Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-12-07
fact that the sheep owners themselves
and their households


and use other articles manufactured from
the wool they sell st tariff prices, and
thus sS consumers must return their share
Of this Increased price to the tradesman.
l think it may be fairly assumed that q
large proportion OF the sheep owned by
the farmers throughout the country are
found in sman fl CHS numbering from
twenty-five to fifty. The duty OF
the grade OF imported wool which
these sheep yield is 10 cents each
pound, if Of the value Of 80 cents or less,
and II cents ii Of the value Of more than
90 cents. II the estimate Of six pounds
be allowed for each fleece the duty there
on would be 60 or ~ cents, and this may
be taken as the utmost enhancement of its
price 10 the farmer by reason OF this duty.
Eighteen dollars would thus represent the
increased price Of wool from twenty-five
sheep, and $50 that from the wool ct
fifty sheep, and at present values this i'd
ditiOn would amount 10 about One-third
Of its price upon its sale. The farmer re-
ceiVes this or less tsriff profit. The
wool leaves his hands charged with pre-
cisely that sum, which in sll its changes
will adhere to it until il reaches the con
sumner. When manufactured into cloth
and other goods and material for use, IFS
cost is not only increased TO the extent
Of the farmers tariff profit, but further
sum has been added for the benefit Of the
manufacturer and the operations of other
tariff law. In the meantime the day ar
rives when the farmer finds il Unnecessary to
purchase wooden goods to clothe himself
and family for the winter. When he faces
the trsdesman for that purpose he disCOv
ers that be is obliged not only to return
il the way Of increased tariff profit On the
wool he sold, and which then perhaps lies
before MIN in manufactured form, but he
must add 8 considerable sum therefor TO
meet
THE FURTHER INCREASE IN COST
caused by tariff duty on the msnufac-
ture. Thus in the end he is aroused TO
the tact that he has paid upon C moderate
purchase as 5 result Of the tarIff scheme,
which when he sold his wool seemed so
profitable, more than sufficient to sweep
away al the tarif profit he received
upon the wool he produced and sold
When the number of farmers engaged il
wool raising is compared with 81 The
fsrmers in the country end;the smsu pro
portion they bear to our popuistiOa is
considered, when it is made apparent that
in the case CT large part Of those who
own sheep the benefit OF the
present tsrif On wool is indirect,
and when it must be SO
conceded that the Increase of the cost Of
living caused by such tariff becomes &
| burden upon those with moderate mesns
and the poor, the employed aud the IN
/ employed, the sick and the well, ard the
young and the old, and that it constitutes
| tax which with relentless grasp is
fastened upon the clothing of every man,
woman and child in tue land, REASONS ere
suggested why the removal or reduction
o. Inis duty should be included in the
revision OF our tariff laws.
| THE COST TO THE CONSUMER.
Speaking Of the increased cost to tbs
consumer Of our home manufacturers Il
sulting from duty laid upon imported
articles of the same description, the fact
| is not overlooked that competition among
our domestic producers some times hss
the effect OF keeping the price Ct their
products below TIE highest limit allowed
| by spca duty. Gu5 it is notorious that
this competition Is too often strAngled by
combinations quite prevalent at this time
and frequently called trusts which have
Tor their objecfs
THE REGULATION OF THE SUPPLY
and price Of commodities made ana sold
by members OF the c0nbiDstiOn. Tee
people caD hardly hope for any cOneidera.
ton in the operation Of these selfish
schemes. II, however, in the absence OF
such combination, healthy and free
competition reduces the price CT any du-
table srtlcle Of home production below
the limit which II might otherwise reach
Under our tariff laws and if with such re-
duced price m&nuiGctuie continues &c
thrive it is entirely evident
that one thing has been discovered
which should b. carefully scrutlDlZ9d ia
an effort to reduce taxatiop-tbe neCes-
sity Of combination to maintain the price
OF any commodity. The tariff furnishes
proof thet some one is Williag to scCep'
lower prices for such commodity, anC
that such prices are remunerative, arc
lower prices produced By comps ti,ior
have proved that same thing. Thus where
either OF these conditions exist g case
would seem to be presented fGr "a eagJ
reduction Of taxation
TO PREVENT SURPLUS REVENUE.
4 The considerations which have beer
presented touching our tariff laws Ct,
intended only to emphasiz4 sn e&rnes
recommendation tnat the surplus rsv6n
ues OF the government be prevented b
the reduction OF our custom duties, snc
Ct the same time to emphasize sugges
ton that in accomplishing this purpose
we may discharge double duty TO oul
people, by granting to them measure C.
relief from tariff taxation in quarters
where il is most needed, and from source:
where it can be most fairly and justly &C
corded.
Nor can the present action made O
such consideration, with any degrees O.
fairness, be regarded as evidence of IN
friendliness toward our manufacturing
interes' 2, or OF any lack of appreciation o
: their value and impor snee. These in.
teTests constitute iesding and mos sab
stsntial element Of our nstionsl greatness
and furnish the proud proof Of GU
c0untry's progress. But, if in the emerg
eucy that presses upon Us, our manu-
facturers are asked to surrender some.
thing
FOR TEE PUBLIC GOOD
and 10 avert disaster, th7ir patriotism a!
we'll IS a grateful recognition of the ad
vantages already afforded should RaC
them to willing cooperation. No de.
mand is made that they shall forego al
the benefits CT governmental regard, on
they cannot fail TO be admonIshed Of theb
|. duty SIS well as their enlightened self-in-